How the heck do you guys get such low C1's?

i have a lite on 40125s with the latest firmware.

i look and see all the media tests posted here with under 8000 C1 errors.

I normally get 50,000 C1 errors, regardless of what disc i use. Even fuji TY’s.

The following pic is a 48x ridata ritek cd burned at 32x, and then read at 32x in the same drive… C1’s are always ~50k.
I don’t wanna make a big deal out of this, but how come everyone else’s error rate is lower than mine…

I would love to see tests like this on a regular basis. of course, this isn’t mine:

I never have problems getting scans like this when I use good quality Taiyo Yuden media…


As TY is not availible here in the craphole we call Estonia, we have to find the other pearls amongst the carbage.

This Ritek disc was written about two years ago, probably with a 20x NEC CD-RW. Sure, the C1 max is a little high for a “perfect” scan, but the C1 total is very sweet. Anyways, the disc has phtalocyanine dye and was sold as 24x Arita CD-R.

RiTEK discs are great too, with the batch of RiTEKs I have right now, C1 average is always <500 through the disc when I burn them at 48x.

Hey there

Rdgrimes said in this thread
http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=84948
“These levels are not too unusual for the 5-series burners with the older media, but improved a lot with later firmware and media. some people get better results by flashing to 48x model firmware, but not always.
If I were you, I’d pick up a 52327S burner from Newegg for $40 shipped and enjoy flawless burning at 48x on just about any media you throw at it.”
“Still the 52327S is in a class by itself, much different than the 40x series.”

Originally posted by link626

I normally get 50,000 C1 errors, regardless of what disc i use. Even fuji TY’s.

I would love to see tests like this on a regular basis. of course, this isn’t mine…

Of course, it’s not yours, it’s alexnoe’s scan > it’s sort of hard to not recognize it. :slight_smile:
Normally it would look almost like terminalvelocd’s if there was ‘Auto Y- Axis Max’ checked in the setup.

Well, now to your main issue. So you’re saying “regardless of what disc i use”, which means that if :

you tune your system…
defragment the HDD…
and the problems still persists…

then it’s high time for a new drive. :wink:

8000 C1 errors is way too much, there should be 15-20x less for a scan to be considered as a good one.

Finally, here’s the media that is about 4 y.o. and the drive - LiteOn LTR12101B.
Kinda like, there’s nothing to expect but just take a look @ this one :

See what I mean ? :smiley:

my system is very optimized.

i scanned an old fuji disc again, and while the c1 error rates are much higher than anyone else’s… they are much better than the ritek burn.

here is a 20x burn, read at 20x.

still, i think the 40125s drive produces crappy results…

Originally posted by link626

still, i think the 40125s drive produces crappy results…

So, it looks like you’re preparing yourself for a new drive, aren’t you ? :wink:

Originally posted by link626
[B]my system is very optimized.

i scanned an old fuji disc again, and while the c1 error rates are much higher than anyone else’s… they are much better than the ritek burn.

here is a 20x burn, read at 20x.

still, i think the 40125s drive produces crappy results…

Scan a good factory pressed CD and see what is the number. If it comes out around the same, then you have no reason to be worried. Maybe the drive is getting old and not able to read the disc as good as before anymore. Remember, these number should is just a number of error YOUR DRIVE reads.

By the way, the number is better than most of CDs i burned anyway. (i don’t mainly use TY) And i’m not that worry yet. :slight_smile: I’ll start to, if my CDs start to not working in my car/discman.

i tested some factory pressed cd’s at max read speed.
the results make my burns look REALLY crappy. Max read tests on my own burns have at least 25000 C1 errors.

this is a microsoft encarta cd:

this is an ibm world book cd:

error rates are much lower.

wtf is wrong with my lite-on. I’m sure other people with 40125s have better burn results than I do. I even use the best TY media.

of course, in the end, the discs are still readable…

Your results are consistant with the older series burners. Suggest you either re-define “crappy”, or get a 52327S burner.

I have a LiteOn LTR-24102B drive (24x write 10x re-write 40x read) with 5S59 firmware and here’s a scan of my latest cd-r burned at 24x

when I insert a blank the Disc Info. tab says this:

Disc Type = CDR (A-)
Manufacturer = Prodisc Technology Inc.

should I expect to get better results with a more recent writer? say I get a LDW-411S so I can do KProbe scans of my DVDs as well?


Originally posted by Trigger should I expect to get better results with a more recent writer? say I get a LDW-411S so I can do KProbe scans of my DVDs as well?

Not with Prodisc CD-Rs, they’re very unreliable at higher speeds.

My LTR-32123S does a reasonable job with write quality but my LTR-52327S is generally a lot better.

If you get an LDW-411S, LDW-451S, LDW-811S, or LDW-851S, you’ll be able to do PI/PO tests on your DVDs with KProbe.

I think i have the same drive (my is CRX195E1.) Did you play with recording speed at all? Or you try to achieve good result at fastest speed.

I’m asking this because for me some disks are better at some certain rate (usually slower.) If you don’t mind losing couple more seconds or minute or 2, results can be such different. (16x usually burn at 4-5 minutes, while 40x is at around 3 minutes.)

This is my cheapo CMC at 40x. Playable, but i want better.


Look what i got what i turn it down a bit to 16x. I know it is not a excellent result, but i’ll take this from cheapo discs.


yeah. that’s to be expected at lower read speeds.

but hey. as long as the CD’s are readable, who cares right?

i will test some cd’s i burnt when i got this drive 1.5 years ago.
if they are still 100% readable, I guess i could care less about the 50000+ C1 errors.

Originally posted by link626

but hey. as long as the CD’s are readable, who cares right?

Exactly


i will test some cd’s i burnt when i got this drive 1.5 years ago.
if they are still 100% readable, I guess i could care less about the 50000+ C1 errors.

To be frank, i still dont really believe that higher error disk prone to go bad over time more than lower ones. It is just that if it’s scratched, with more C1C2 intact it may be able to correct more than those with so much errors already.

When disks go bad over time, usually it is because of its chemical. If CD itself is rotten, it will take out so much good data with it. No amount of C1C2 will help.

Of course, better chemical, sealed and quality material will make CDs last longer. Crappy burn (full of C1) on TYs, probably last longer than good burn on cheapo discs. Maybe somebody can explain to me more, if i have this wrong.

That’s why i don’t mind using cheap CD (save money) and try to get acceptable burn quality out of it. Always not great C1 but work well enough for me. So far disks gone bad on me mostly causes by my marker, temp in my car, scratches and my crappy handling.

To be frank, i still dont really believe that higher error disk prone to go bad over time more than lower ones. It is just that if it’s scratched, with more C1C2 intact it may be able to correct more than those with so much errors already.

When disks go bad over time, usually it is because of its chemical. If CD itself is rotten, it will take out so much good data with it. No amount of C1C2 will help.

This is a good point. However, If a disc with 50,000 errors to begin with collects another 50,000 over time, your’re in trouble.
If a burn with 50 errors collects these same 50,000 over time, you’re still in the clear.